The Sun. — London, England, 1836-07-09 00:00:00

. - 5.................,.......... ..,...-..r.............................................. r........................................, might have been applied to )ecal Wants in other places He would not go into the whole plan of the Commissioners, 'equally requiring' them. thetelbre it was thou to take th e w h ole of this revenue, which ht better but be would st a t e th e c i rcumstances o f some o f t h e par i shes amounted to 'about 1.50000/., and make the arrangement now proposed. in which there was a large population, the spiritual wants of The Noble Lord here quoted from documents to the fol- which were inadequately au lied, His Lordship quoted from the following table t- Partslici. Ptulalion Church room Jawing effect :- Pre po-ed Arrangement of 4 ~,t..-. 166,000 • • 8,200 - episcopal Incomes according to L0nd0n....,..........,,...,... 21 • 7,30,000 ...%.,, 60,155 Third Re p o lc-Propositions 41 and 42, 9 • 1 5 ,8 9 00 t•RoposITIoN 41. , ' ' '•hesktfn . .... ... 38 -...v., 816,000 .74 Estimated PrOpqnsi ) , cces4. York ..• • • • • ,2.0 • Income. future income. Lichtiela and Vo.Velltry 16 I. Canterbury ~.....,.18,090 ~ ...,...15 0(Y0 3 090 , ......----..-.. ---- , ..... , York ............... 10,270 ....... .10,000 108 9 ,590,000 London .. .......... 13,890 ....... ..10,000 One-ninth. Durham .. ...... : ... 19,480 - Winchester ......... 1 0 ,T370 ........ 7,0130 CHESTER DIOCESE. ............... . 9,400 ..... .... 5,00 3,900 ..., ,-, e• W OreeSter ......... 6,500 Rectory, - 0 - Impro. s- , v 3z ; Bath and Wells .., 5,550 .-3 .F... St. Ariph ...... ... 5.500 Z or Curacy. V r, Bar, goy ----- 'E - - - ---.-- ----- - 7 - . x. ---- ----- Motram, in ~ , r Bishop ofl Bishop f ID- 15536 219' -- 102,860 70,700 32,160 Londondale...s " c-ra g e / Chester. j Chester. Collegiate ----- -_- .-____. Nceton,in Man. 11621' 155 - } Perpet.Curacy/ Church 2. Bristol 2,090 t Deficiency. chester Manchester. Gloucester 2,130 S .... •.. 5,000 .... 780 Oldham r Rector of") 32381 191 - t Preswich.S PROPOSITION 42. 6360 294 - Runcorn 3 . Carlisle ocan i mi Chester . 713 88 - i Chester. Chichester .St. David's ed With great 1 Hill .... 41.4., Tithe= Exeter %9 3616 - Win*lek t , Hereford - 3 Lichfield ......... 4,500 ...... la ( ' Whittle le Woods Perpet.Curacy 2987 40 - 1710 96 - Lincoln 1,170 Wood Plumpton Perpet.Curacy Llandaff 3,330 Perpet Curacy under Lyne...} - • Oxford 1,600 ... Collegiate . f Peterborough ...... 3,380 ......... 4,500 11238 116 - I 1,120 Heaton Norris.... Perpet.Curacy Church Rochester 1,450 ......... 4,500 ...... 3,oso Nfanchester. . Dean and --_- 1015 101 ----- ----- Halt Perpet.Curacy/ Chapter of . 33,560 54,000 20,440 Winchester. . Manchester ........................... 4,500 4• 4,500 Douglas, in Ee. ..... 1474 70, - F 6. N R o ip r o n n lch ... ..... ..... . . 4 . , .. ,:wc . ) ........... 4 i 5 ,7 0: 0 1 4,500 c1e5t0n.,,,b,.,, Saint Bridget's, 766 7.5 1 - Vituter Rec tor y I r , Salisbury SUMMARY. lie thoug,ht be was iustifipd in saving that +1,,,,,,,i, 4L.,.. - From. To. Excess. Deficiency, £ £ £ lt. 9 s ees tr. , be reduced 102,860 70,700 32 , 160 .£ LI 1 see to be raised... ... 780 .3. 12 sees to be raised 4,220 5,000 1 to 4,500 i. each. 33,560 54,000 4. 2 lieu* see s at the same . 4 . 2 ti na l kered .. 9,000 9,700 9,700 lie thought he was justified in saying that though there was the sum of 130,000/. proposed to be devoted to the object he had stated, that sum being derived from the cathedral churches, not only must that amount be very soon exhausted, but if it were much larger there would evidently be the means of employing it advantageously in those parishes in which there had grown up an immense popula tion, and in which there was no adequate income for the clergy. What he was now stating, in his opinion, bore very much on the question which had been often mooted . in this House an d e l sew h ere, b ut to w hi ch he did not now wish more particularly to allude than to state it ; he meant the question as to whether the revenues of the deans and chapters in this country might not be applied to other pur poses than those connected with the Church—whether this were not wanted for the Church itself.--(Hear.) It ap peared to him that this question was settled by the, state ment he had made, and by the Report of the Commis sioners. It was certainly contrary to his opinion,and to the opinion expressed by the Commissioners, that the whole of the revenue of the deans and chapters should be applied as at present ; yet such was the deficiency of spiritual instruc tion in parts of those districts, that they could not, with a due regard to the efficiency of the Church, apply them to other purposes than to supply the spiritual wants of the people. There was another Bill which he would not enter particularly into now, but which formed a part of the gene ral scheme ; he meant the Bill which had come down from the House of Lords with respect to pluralities and resi dence. In the report of the Commissioners were to be found many instances of clergymen who, while there were parishes so inadequately supplied, were holding two or three rectories, and, perhaps, sinecures amongst them, of the value of 2,800/. and 3,000/. and upwards, arid al lowing very small sums for the performance of the duties to the curates of the parishes to which they belonged. This had been felt, and must be felt, as a great defect and great grievance.—(Hear, hear.) It had been an object with the Commissioners, as far as possible, to put an end to these grievances, and to this purpose they proposed that residence should be strictly enforced. The Bill required that each clergyman should be resident on his living for nine months in the year ; in case of any special exemp tion a return was to be made to the King in Council, which would afterwards be laid before Parliament, so that any case of undue indulgence would be immediately known. The Bill would also prohibit persons from holding two livings together, except they were within ten miles of each other. That in effect would, he thought, put an end to pluralities altogether. S o f ar as hi s exam i nat i on h a d gone he consi dered he was under the mark when he said that nine tenths of the pluralities at present existing would be put an end to by a provision of that sort. Nor under this Bill would a person bolding a living of 5001. a year hold another except under peculiar circumstances. There were some cases in which it might be an advantage for a living poorly endowed, to be held by a clergyman with a large in come from another living if he chose to undertake the smaller one. With respect to the abolition of pluralities, there were some cases of difficulty, such as those in which the livings were so small as not to afford a sufficient remu neration ; hut he himself did not much apprehend embar rassment here, because in most of those instances there had been curates, the fact being that the living was in itself not so poor, but the greater portion of it was taken by the rectors. With respect to the patronage in the hands of the Crown, he did not entertain the objection to it felt by some. He considered it the means of connecting the State with the Church, and thought it would be a great evil to have a Church totally unconnected with the State. Placing Church patronage in the hands of the Crown afforded the means of uniting the Church with the State, and thus gave an assurance that the Crown would take care of the welfare of the Church on the one hand, and on the other that the Church would not attempt to counteract the general policy of the State ; nor did he object to patronage being left in the hands of private individuals. In a country like this persons composing the different classes of society should have their interests as much as possible interwoven one with the other. He was further of opinion, that it was advantageous to have a small amount of patronage in the hands of the bishops, inasmuch as it was the duty of the bishops to observe and superintend the conduct of the clergy ; and one way of enabling them to do so with effect was to give them the power of bestowing rewards, as well as the power of discouraging improper conduct. If a clergyman had conducted satisfactorily the affairs of a small benefice for a great number of years, it might be considered that he had a claim on the bishop, which would, perhaps, not be attended to so immediately either by the Crown, or by those who possessed private patronage. He considered it right that the bishops should have the power of attending to cases of this description. With respect to the other classes of preferment in the hands of the deans and chapters, without entering into that question, or throwing blame on any parties, he might say he did not see any par ticular reason why large numbers should be without the rewards to which they were fairly entitled, while many not only had a stall in one of the cathedrals, but likewise held a benefice. He thought it was fairly proposed by the Commissioners, with a view to augment the livings, that the bishops in future, in cases where canons did not take the preferment themselves, should have the power of distri buting the patronage which had hitherto been in the hands of the dean and chapters. He believed he had now al luded to the principal heads of the scheme proposed by the Church Commissioners. It appeared to him that this was a measure of reform which, while it was of a temporary cha racter, would cure the evils of which there was abundant reason to complain. If this Bill passed there would exist no longer those immense incomes—there would exist no longer those offensive pluralities—those excessive in comes of the deans and chapters, while there were large districts in which no provision was made for the religious wants of the people. It was his fate, some years ago, to state that, in his opinion, the revenues of the Church of England were not too large, but that they ought to be more equitably distributed. The expres sion of that opinion brought down upon him the cen sure of a Right Reverend Prelate ; but he still en tertained the same opinion ; and he was now sup ported in his view by this Report of the Commissioners, who declared it to be their opinion that the revenues of the Church might be more equally distributed—that they might be distributed in a Manner more conducive to the efficiency of the Establishment. In proposing this change, however, they did not propose, nor did they think it expe dient any more than he did, to diminish the revenues of the Church. He trusted that these Bills would be carried into effect, and he trusted this object would be accomplished without exciting any opposition or any irritation such as similar plans had before excited. He could not conclude without paying the tribute of thanks due to the Archbishop at the head of the Commission, who had shown every dis position to consult public opinion where he thought it just and reasonable. His Lordship concluded by moving " for leave to bring in a Bill to carry into effect the Fourth Re port of the Commissioners on Ecclesiastical Duties and Revenues." Mr. C. LUSHINGTON proposed an amendment— " That an bumble address be presented to his Majesty, praying that his Majesty will be graciously pleased to issue his commands to the Commissioners appointed to extanine into the state of the Established Church iA England, tc. take into consideration and report their opinion on the expediency of abolishing the existin g system of the translation of bit ;hops from one see to another." Mr. E WART seconded the amendment. He could not see any equality in a syste m in which the revenues of the bishops so much varied --the differences existing in tl te in comes of the bishops were, in his opinion, so many steps in the ladder of ambition. If they did away with transla tions, there would be no longer temptations to ambiti on in the Church. He objected to this measure, because it pro vided for the great aristocracy of the Church, instel d of 20,440 9,000 X 150,340 148,400 32,160 30,220 148,400 30,220 £1,940 £1,940 Thus, dividing the proposed income of 150,000/. among the archbishops and bi s h ops , i t would give To the Archbishop of Canterbury £l5OOO To th e Archbistio , 10,000 of York To the Bishe,p of London To the, Bishop of Win c h es t er Anrft t o ot h er bishops various sums, the high e st amount being 5,500 „... And th e l owest amount being 4,500 Ile thou g h t that by this arrangement he should provide for these bishoprics in a manner which could not be said to exhibit either extravagance or any undue proportion. He 'knew it might be stated that the revenues of an Archbishop ... Of Canterbur7 or of the Bishop of London should not be as 14 6 as he had proposed it ; but he must say he thought the ofcomparison that had been made as between an Archbishop Canterbury or a Bishop of London, and persons holding civil and judicial offices, was obviously not a just compari son- Person s filling Pettses the :latte r o ffi ces i ncurred certain ex connected with the duties of their office, but there the demand upon their salaries ended. With respect to an archbishop or bishop, he was placed according to the con stitution of the Church, and that constitution he did not wish to alter, among persons having a large revenue derived from the property of the country. He was placed in a cer tain house which required a certain establishment to be main tained, and that there should be observed certain duties of lospitality ; he was placed in a situation in which even more was required from him than from men of ran k and land e d prop ge e xpense bei ng i ncurre d b y him on account of charity. In all these respects his situation teas totally different from that of a Chief Justice of the ring's Bench or a First Lord of the Treasury, who re ceivquented an official salary co nse , out o f w hi c h he paid the expenses 'on the performance of the duties of his office, and nothing else. It was not the plan of our Church that its ministers should be considered mere functionaries, receiving certain stipends from the State, and having aiothing but their bare duty to perform as a return for their stipends.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Nor did he propose bpd the p reeent Bill to alter the plan in that respect ; unless Parliament did alter it, they could make no fair - I , S corraparison between the situation of a Bish at the 'ad of the Church, and the situation of those holding °"[Le-lal salaries. He came next, after the duties and reve slikvres of the Bishops, to consider the duties and revenues of :11t cathedral deans and chapters. Several of these dig 011aries were now held by Bishops, and the Commis them enters thought that objectionable ; they thought it took the be performe avvae fro m t h e ought to performance of the duties which d • and they were of opinion, also, that ' tam' 1 duti es of the deans and chapters ought to be sub- The 'a IY performed by persons appointed for that purpose. not Commissioners were further of opinion, that it was ° necessary to have so large an establishment as now ex of these Isted for the performance of that description of duty. Many were sinecure dignitaries, and in some of the dis tricts ther e was an excessive number, there being at e .Beille time in suc h di stricts a great want of spiritual instruc th ' l _ ° N It see me d to the Commissioners, whatever abstract 0 W pion they might entertain with respect to the utility of such •ai gnitaries b e i ng ma i nta i ned as rewards for learning and piety I 'l:the Ch urc h, t h at they might, with a due regard to the em cieney of the Church, make a considerable reduction in .the cathedral deans and chapters. But acting on the prin. fie he had explained of removing the defects and abuses ,the Church, and not altering the general form and prin 'Nei of the establishment, they did not entertain the Pro Position of doing away with these cathedral dignitaries. Some had made that pr oposition, but it did not appear to the 'Commissioners that it would be wise to destroy that establish ment. The Commic,sioners were of opinion that three or four c anons were as small a number as would be required by the cathedral duties, and at the same iime they had left neither the whole in,..ome of the se diff erent canons, nor that reward for literary merit, the ease which was formerly found in many of the c a th e d ra l establishments. Their opinion with regard to seine many of th e cat h e d ra l s, was that of the canons, tane one or more might we ll per f orm a d uty of great impor t to the Church remuneration, vi z ., th e d uty o f archdeacon. nauerated th was no duty w hi c h ought to be more adequately re ere an that o f t h e archdeacon, and it appeared that re there to b etter way of obtaining that object than by ar Prose ing one or m ore of the canons, as occasion might i, I :er the performance of that duty. Much depended on tae archdeacons ; the bishop derived from them his k l ne. lur vvied ge o f his diocese, and by th e i r super i nten d ence the Yor e cthe h was kept in that state of repair which was necessary performance of divine service. There were other cases in which it was not thou g ht expedient that th ese member was canonries should remain —he a ll u d ed to those in which the situated in large unusually large, and in which they were Parishes where there was no adequate provision for the religious instruc . tion of the people. It was thought that , canonries might in some instances, be safely employed in the performance ance of those du ties ;and while 4 sufficient mean s P would be afforded to them, there would be assigned to them an important paro chial duty. InaSmuch, then, as there would be three or four canons left to every cathedral, it could not be said that the Establishment would have withdrawn from i t _ that being ground which had been frequently combatted, and h e w a s not one who thought it ought to be surrendered ground—the means of providing for the wants of men of distinguished learning and abilities. Tere were men to Whom owl: of those canonri es , connected with much business and lab our, would not be suited, because those most dis tingu:,shed for learning were frequently not the best men of business, or the best adapted to large and populous parishes. Ttaere would be a certain number, then, but it would be a 'Mall number, of canonries left, in which the only service to be performed would be the cathedral service— which(Ha— would not be connected with ay other duties. The result of this change with respect tout he cathedrals Would be to procure a large sum for the purposes of parishes lovhich wanted spiritual care. His Lordship here read the following : Pe, Estimated amount of the property and revenues referred to `roposition 5 6 of the 4th Report, from each source res ively I. Corporate Incomes of all the suppressed Re- sidentiary Canonries, propositions 1, 2, 1 5 (excepti ng at Chester and Lichfield proposi tion 16, and i n the Welch Cathedrals.—Pro positions 21 , 24, 25)64,699 2. Separate Estates of all Deans and Canons on the old foundation, proposition 17 (excepting where w h o ll y or in part specially appropriated, 3' Sproposition 18, 31) eparate Estates of Deans and C anons o f 17,194 Durham...... 11,510, and Ely ............. . .260 But see Proosition 36) 4 . Separate Endowments p of all sinecure prebends and offices, proposition 30 (excepting those .annexed to bishoprics._. 3d Report, proposi tion 50, and those specially appropriated.- 4th Report, propositions 22, 26, 3 1 ) 5. Sinecure Rectories —Proposition 44 120,494 8,894 £129,388 THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, JULY 9, .1836. providing for the democracy in the Church. They were enlarging the ornaments of the edifice, when they ought to be extending and strengthening the foundation. With re spect to translations it was to be remarked that the majo rity of those belonging to the Church were opposed to, and Doctor Burton, of Oxford, declared that he never yet had found a single clergyman who was an advocate for translations. He confessed that he could not consider the: measure then submitted to them as a measure of rea' Church Reform. They ought to look more to the demo cracy of the Church than they had done. Sir LOVE PARRY knew, he said, of a Right Rev. Prelate, in whose diocese was the Cathedral town that he represented. That Right Rev. Prelate had not an income beyond 3,8001., and he had announced in an address to his clergy, that he had no desire to be translated from that diocese. Mr. IVA SON observed that if all the patronage now 7 in the hands of the bishops were placed in the hands Commissioners, a fund would be provided sufficient to in crease small livings and for the building of churches. H€ could not see why this ought not to be done. The bishops said their incomes varied from 4,0001. to 5,0001, a year. For a bishop, he thought, 4,5001. a year ought to be suffi cient. The extra 5001. a year would form a surplus, from which spiritual aid might be provided for 136,000 of the King's subjects. He thought they ought not to proceed farther with this Bill. Mr. HARLAND observed that the Bill proposed to them was founded on three Reports, and they had only two of those Reports before them. Under these circumstances he thought the Bill ought to be postponed to the next ses sion. He hoped the House would not sanction the taking away 10,0001. a year from the diocese of Durham until the spiritual wants of the people of that diocese were fully provided for. Mr. HUME wished to enter his protest against this Bill, at the same time he was not at all desirous to stop ; because, so far as it went, it was good. He protested, however, against it as a settlement of the question. It was allowed that the Deans and Chapters had enormous in comes, and, in connection with that fact, he thought they were bound to consider how they could deal with the ques tion of Church-rates.---( Hear, hear.) As his Majesty's Government had pledged themselves to a reform as to Church-rates, the public expected and hoped they would have the courage to make such a proposition. That House would support them. Every day the feeling respecting Church-rates was becoming stronger, and he assured his Majesty's Ministers that neither eould Church-rates be paid out of the Consolidated Fund ; and to go on with them, as they were now, was impossible.—(Hear, hear.) Why not provide for Church-rates out of the sinecures of the Church ? The Noble Lord stated his wish to continue the connection between Church and State. Unless the Noble Lord put an end to Church -rates, questions would be constantly arising which would risk that connection.— (Hear, hear.) It was to be remarked that the revenues of the bishops were not simply from 4,0001. to 5,000/. ; but a bishop, by the patronage in his power, could provide for all his relatives in the male and female line. He could not allow the Bill to pass without entering his protest against it. Sir R. PEEL remarked that upon the proposal of the Noble Lord to go into Committee, a motion was made and seconded to prevent the translation of bishops. The Hon. Gentlemen who proposed and seconded the amendment confined themselves strictly to the merits of the amendment they supported. All those who supported them, in his opinion rather strayed away from the amendment.—(Hear, hear.) With respect to the case of the see of Durham, as oe did not see that it had any necessary relation to the ques tion at large, he could not discuss it at present. He thought however, that before the question was debated further, it would be very convenient to know whether the Hon. Mem ber intended to press his motion to a division or not. Mr. LUSHINGTON said it certainly was his inten , ion to press his motion to a division. Sir it PEEL in that case should certainly adhere to the Bill of the Noble Lord, because he cordially approved, in the main, of the principle upon which it was framed. He did not believe that there were any sincere friends of the Church, more desirous to clear it from its imperfections, and to place it upon a reformed footing, than the bishops who composed the late ecclesiastical Commission. The whole conduct of those bishops showed how desirous they were to give practical efficiency to their views of remedial measures ; they unhesitatingly followed the example just set them by the then Ministry, and relinquished a large share of patronage, in order that it might be applied to purposes of general utility. The Honourable Member for Liverpool, in the course of the present debate, had endeavoured to raise a distinction bcween what he was pleased to term the aristocracy and the democracy of the Church, and seemed to assume that clergy men i n t h e l ower stat i ons o f the Church had no interest in the emoluments attached to the higher prefer ments. Now this was a position which he (Sir R. Peel) must unhesitatingly deny. He maintained, on the contrary, that by upholding the dignity and the emoluments of the higher offices in the Church, they were also defending the interests and the rights of the so-called democracy of churchmen. When they read the names, and recollected the history of those pious men, who had risen by the force of their intrinsic merit and extreme learning to the highest dignities in the Church, would the House require any fur ther argument to show that there was no real line of de marcation between the democracy and the aristocracy of the Church ?—(Hear, hear, hear.) He maintained that by holding out those high offices to the emulation of the clergy at large, as a reward for distinguished merit or ex traordinary service, they were encouraging a very laudable, and, at the same time, a cheering spirit of ambition amongst them. No doubt considerable inequality existed in the emoluments of the different bishoprics ; but he apprehended that, from the peculiar usages and customs in different sees, and the difference in expense attendant upon them, that inequality was less in reality than was generally reported. But there was another point of view in which he thought this subject should be considered. It appeared to him that by allowing of some degree of inequality between the different sees, they would assimilate the Church Establish ment in some degree to the other civil institutions of the country, and with an evident advantage not only to the Church but to the country itself. Certain he was that the system of unequal division had not been countenanced, either by preceding Governments or by the present Go vernment, with any view to influence the Bishops in their political conduct by the hope of promotion.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman spoke against the propriety of hold ing out an object of ambition to the Bishops. Now, this involved a question of great importance, which ought not to he hastily decided, namely, whether the bishops ought or ought not to be wholly excluded from all voice and participation in political m itt-Ts, and all share i ithe management of the civil affairs of the country. For his own part he was free to declare that he believed, that on the whole it was of great advantage to the country that the bishops were per mitted, under certain restrictions, to take part and hold an interest in the general affairs of the community. He be lieved, that if the country were to have a class of ecclesias tics who were to be totally disconnected from all concern in civil affairs, and altogether removed from politics, it would also have an infinitely less enlightened, and an infinitely less liberal body of men, in every respect, with less capacity for the religious duties of their station, than it had at pre sent. The Hon. Gentleman further complained that the Government in power, for the time being, always se lected their own friends for promotion to a vacant see. Now, that appeared to him (Sir R. Peel) to be a very na tural consequence, from parties in power having the choice at all in such matters.—( Hear, hear! from the back Minis terial benches.) Yes, he maintained that it was a very natural, and he did not think a very blameable, course of proceeding. With respect to the Bill now before the Douse, it was undoubtedly a great measure of reform, and one the more likely to be of permanent utility, because it had to a great extent been brought about through the cheerful co-operation of the ecclesiastical body themselves, and because it had been framed with a friendly regard to the safety of the whole Church Establishment. He believed there was no desire on the part of the Bishops to maintain the system of pluralities ; at the same time, the necessity, which every one must be aware of, of providing for 'the duties of certain smaller livings, must render it impracti cable entirely to abolish that practice. He believed that the point to which the present Bill went in that particular, was the very utmost extent which, with safety to the Church Establishment, could be attempted. Mr. T. B. LENNARD complained that the Bill only provided one course of proceeding against a clergyman for non-residence ; namely, at the hands of the bishop, or at least through his permission ; he hoped that in Committee the Bill would be altered in this particular. Sir R. H. INGLIS said that by reference to the list of promotions for late years at least, it would be seen that a majority of them had been generally in favour of what bad just been termed the democratic portion of the clergy. With respect to translations also, it should be recollected that the expenses attendant upon them were very great, often sufficient to swallow up the whole first year's income. Mr. A. TREVOR should certainly vote against the motion of the Hon. Member for Ashburton. The Hon. Member then defended the practice of translations, as a great advantage to the zealous performance of the duties of the Church—provided they were not so frequent as to render the Bishop indifferent to the charge in his hands. After a few words from Lord EBRINGTON, which were not heard, Mr. F. BUXTON complained that the present measure did not go far enough ; much more would be required be fore they could hope to obtain for this country any thing like a substantial Church Reform. He maintained that before they consented by the present Bill to give the Arch bishop of Canterbury 15,0001. a year, and the Bishop of London 10,0001. a year, the house should take care that after so doing they would leave enough to provide a decent and adequate maintenance for the lower orders of the clergy. The House should call to mind that there were 300 clergy whose aggregate income did not amount to 15,000/. a year, some of whom had barely 2s. Bd. a day to live upon. He had recently read the report of a Society having the bene volent purpose of affording relief to the distressed clergy ; and when he read it stated with what heartfelt thanks trifling sums of 51. and 10/. had been received, it served to convince him what real objects of commiseration there must be amongst that class of persons. Another report which he had read, and which he was almost ashamed to allude to, called for contributions of cast-off clothes,. which it appeared were gratefully received by these meritorious and ill-paid individuals.—(Hear, hear.) There was the greatest disproportion between the population and stipends of the clergy in various districts throughout the country. Much complaint had lately been made of that clause in the Irish Church Bill by which the income of the clergy of that Church was proportioned to the mem bers connected with it in each parish. Now he ventured to say that if the principle of the clause were adopted with respect to the English Church, the effect would be to double the stipends of upwards of 2,000 individuals. The large incomes of the Bishops should be cut down, in consi deration of the wants of the Church ; and the main princi ple of the Irish Church should be applied to the Church of this country—namely, an apportionment of stipend in ac cordance with the duties which were to be performed by the clergy.—(Hear, hear, hear.) It was commencing at the wrong end to make a provision for the Bishops before all other considerations. He felt the more strongly on this part of the question because he had been told that there were in a district in London with which he was acquainted 70,000 persons, for whom no religious instruction was pro vided. He had inquired into the truth of this statement, and he ascertained that, making every conceivable allow ance, there were 60,000 persons who could by no possibility, and upon no emergency of circumstances, receive any re ligious instruction. He thought, then, that the desirable objects which he had pointed out might be fully accom plished by the reduction of the incomes of the bishops, and by private and public subscriptions. He was willing to give the members of the Commission credit for a conscien tious conviction that in the reforms which they proposed they were consulting the best interests of the Church ; but there was one recommendation made by them to which he could not extend that expression of approval, and of which he felt bound to complain. He alluded to the assignment of salaries to the deans and canons. Now, the Dean of Chester was to have 440/. a year, and the canon 187/. ; whilst the Dean of Durham was to be allowed 4,594/. a year, and each of the canons 2,0001. a year. In other words, a Dean of Durham was made worth ten Deans of Chester, and a Canon of Durham equal to a dozen Canons of Chester.—(Hear, hear, hear.) It was, in his opinion, very unjustifiable that such anomalies 'as those to which he had referred should be suffered to exist. There was ano ther point to which he wished to address himself. He considered it undoubtedly important that the salaries of the bishops and clergy should be determined upon ; but he looked upon it as a matter of still deeper concern to decide who should be appointed to a bishopric or benefice. He did not agree with the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) that politics ought not to be excluded when the choice of a bishop was to be made. Neither did he think that pro motion in the Church ought to depend on connection with some noble family, or on the political aid afforded in some Parliamentary struggle, or on the circumstance of an indi vidual happening to be a tutor to some Member of a Ca binet ; for a man might make an admirable tutor, and yet be a very poor clergyman or bishop. None of these con siderations should be made the sole test of a person's qualification for such offices. He begged in what he had stated not to be understood as alluding to any modern ap pointments. Though willing to believe that the Commis sioners desired to effect a reform in the Church, yet he could not shut his eyes to such a fact as that to which he had referred—that there was a bishopric with 15,0001. a year, and that some of the clergy had less than 501. a year.. He warned the Government and the House against the effects of tardy legislation where a grievance existed and called foe prompt redress. Such a system of legisla tion had lost them America. Should they unfortunately determine to delay the real reform of the Church for a much longer period, he greatly feared that the conse quences (which he for one did not at all desire) would soon follow—that it would be reformed with a vengeance. —(Hear.) Mr. GOULBURN observed that the Hon. Member had omitted to state that 150,0001. had been taken from the higher livings and sinecures of the Church, in order better to provide for the religious instruction of the people. --(Hear, hear.) With regard to what had been said by the Hon. Gentlemanan as to the circumstances which were considered, in the Hon. Gentleman's opinion, essential to advancement in the Church, he did not hesitate to say that there were no bishops of any Church, no matter how selected, who were more free from the imputation of having attained to their station through political influence, or who were more remarkable for their attachment to their reli gious duties. The proposition, however, which filled him with most astonishment in the observations of the Hon. Gentleman was his recommendation that the operation of the present Bill should be limited to one year.—(Hear, hear.) What object could there be in making the experi ment of altering all the incomes of those who belonged to the Church, if, at the end of a year, they were again to re ceive their present incomes ? If he (Mr. Goulburn) thought that there was another arrangement required for promoting still further than the present Bill the instruction of the destitute classes, he would still give his ready assent to the present measure, which had been approved of by the heads of the Church, and which exceeded the expecta tions of all those whose object was to reform and not de stroy the establishment ?—Hear, hear.) Mr. F. BUXTON explained. Mr. POULTER, though he would be the most ungrate ful of men if he did not entertain a sincere respect and ve neration for the Established Church, yet could not help saying that the emoluments derived from the Church were very unequally divided, and that some of the incomes were more befitting temporal princes than spiritual pastors. The great principle from which the friends of the Church should never have departed, and to which they ought as speedily as possible return, was this--to connect the Established Church with the population of the country, and wherever there were inhabitants let there be also a Church. Mr. C. BULLER took the same view of the subject that had been taken by the Hon. Member for Weymouth, and maintained that the Bill was miserably deficient as a mea sure of Church Reform. There was throughout the coun try a strong, earnest, and sober desire for the Reform of the Church ; and the people would never be satisfied till such a Reform was effected. As to what the Hon. Gen t'emen on the other side of the House called the great prizes of the Church, and lauded as such, they were, in his his opinion, great sources of political jobbing. As to the 13.11, in his opinion, it would be much better to withdraw it : and by the next Session, his Majesty's Ministers might, perhaps, be able to prepare a Bill which would prove a real and permanent measure of Reform of the Church of England. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that undoubtedly the withdrawing of the Bill might lead to this advantageous result, that it would give the Hon. Mem ber an opportunity of rendering himself acquainted with the Report of the Commissioners, and the measure founded upon it, which it was evident he had not yet done.---(A Ilugh.) If the House were to be guided by the statement of the Hon. Gentleman, they would believe that the only object of the Report and the Bill was to place the lower bishoprics on a level in point of emolument with the higher. Now that was not a candid statement. It kept out of sight the fact that the Bill restored a number of benefices which were at present held in COMMendal7l to the working clergy. It enacted also, that all that remained after duly providing fir the cathedral services should be applied to the general diffusion of religious instruction. He (th e Chancelor of the Exchequer) rejoiced that such a measure, enforcing such a sysi.em, had been introduced into Parliament with the consent of the high authorities of the Church. Mr. LUSHINGTON should persevere in his amend rnent. The House then divided— For the amendment Against it ,.... 124 Majority Leave was then given to bring in the . Bill ; which was brought in accordingly, and read a first time. ESTABLISHED CHURCH BILL. The motion, for the House to resolve itself into a Com mittee on this Bill, having been put, Mr. TREVOR expressed his regret that he must op pose the Speaker's leaving the chair. It was notorious that the Bill went to abstract a large annual revenue from the see of Durham, and did not confer any local benefit in return. Strongly opposed, therefOre, to what he conceived to be an act of gross injustice towards his constituents, he would move, as an amendment, that the Bill be committed on that day six months. Lord JOHN RUSSELL intimated his intention to di vide the House upon the point.. Mr. G. F. YOUNG could not support the Hon. Mem ber's proposition. . Mr. LAMBTON supported the motion. Sir 11. WILLIAMSON supported the motion upon similar grounds. Lord JOHN RUSSELL, said the same argument might be made available, if admitted now, to put off the principle altogether, not only in reference to Durham but to the whole country. Mr. POTTER said he was favourable to delay, but for very different reasons from those stated by the Hon. Mem ber for Durham. The Bill now before the House was very a dvantageous to the Established Church, and would greatly tend to and consolidate it. That was 'evident from the support it had received from the Hon. Gentlemen, the Members for the University of Oxford and Cambridge, and others on the opposite side of the House. The louse had passed another measure—the English Tithe Bill, which would also be of immense benefit to the Establish ment—in the discussion on the second reading of the Tithe Bill in the other House that was admitted. He h a d no enmity to the Church ; but the House of Commons before it sanctioned the Bill on the table, should consider that other measures of great importance to the Catholics of Ireland, and the Dissenters of England, ought also to be passed : he would vote for delay, until it was seen whether the Irish Church Bill, and the Registration, and Dissen ters' Marriage Bills were sanctioned by the other House of Parliament. If the Established Church Bill, and the English 'l'ithe Bill once were carried, he much feared the Catholics of Ireland and the Dissenters of England would obtain no redress.—(Hear,.bear.) Mr. W YNN deprecated any delay. The House'then divided— For the Amendment 22 For going into Committee .. Majority --- 120 The House then went into Committee. Mr. JERVIS rose to say, that the House having gone into Committee in consequence of the majority against the Hon. Member's amendment, he had thus been prevented from moving, as he had intended, by way of instruction to the Committee, "that no clergyman not fully conversant with the Welsh language be appointed to any see or bene fice in the Principality." Unless he were permitted to put this motion now, he should move that the Chairman report progress and ask leave to sit again. Mr. L AMBTON described himself as similarly circum stanced in reference to an instruction he had been about to move to the Committee respecting the bishopric of Durham. Lord J. RUSSELL though the House could hardly ac cede to the proposition of the Hon. Member who 'spoke last but one ; and as to the motion of the Hon. Member who spoke last, it could be much more appropriately brought forward in another Bill. Mr. C. W. WYNN recommended that the Hon. Mem ber should propose his motion as an instruction to the Com mittee on the second Bill. The preamble was then postponed. On clause 1 (relating to the appointment of Commis sioners) being put, Sir LOVE PARRY eulogised the conduct of the Com missioners, and above all the Archbishop of Canterbury, but contended that sufficient attention had not been paid to the situation of the inhabitants of Wales in the new ar rangement of the Welsh dioceses. He would conclude with expressing his sincere hope that the House would not allow the see of Bangor to merge into any other, and that no part of the funds belonging to such see shall be withdrawn from it. Mr. RIGBY WASON contended that too great power would be placed by this clause in the hands of the Com missioners, and that power might get into the hands of those who would make a dangerous use of it, and engross it to themselves. In truth, the Noble Lord proposed to transfer to the Commissioners the whole power the Government now had in the Church. Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied that the objection of the Hon. Gentleman might be good if the Commissioners had unlimited power given to them, and could make what rules they pleased ; but they were constrained and checked by the 10th clause. The question, however, was, whether the course suggested was not the best adapted to carry into effect the object in view, namely, to recommend such regu lations and rules as they might deem necessary for working out the plan in view. Mr. lIIGBY WASON contended that the preamble did not bear out the statement made by the Noble Lord that the Commissioners were checked by the 10th clause. Clauses 1 and 2 were agreed to. Upon clause 3 being proposed, Mr. HINDLEY objected to it as unnecessary. moved that the clause be struck out. The House divided. For the clause Against it Majority Clauses 4 to 8 agreed to. The House resumed, and the Chairman reported progress -58 COMMON FIELDS ENCLOSURE BILL. The House went into Committee on this Bill. The Bill having been gone through, and agreed to, with some verbal amendments, the House resumed. On the motion of Mr. EWART, the Conviction Bill was read a second time. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACTS AMEND MENT BILL. On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EX CHEQUER, a new clause was added to this Bill, and a Committee appointed to draw up reasons for disagreeing from some of the Lords' amendments on the Bill. CORPORATE PROPERTY (IRELAND). Lord MORPETH obtained leave to bring in a Bill to .estrain the alienation of Corporate property in Ireland. POST-OFFICE. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER ob tained leave to bring in a Bill for the regulation of the Post-office. The other Orders of the Day having been disposed of, the House adjourned at a quarter to two. KING'S THEATRE. The attendance on Thursday night, for the benefit of Perrot, was numerous and fashionable, and the entertainments provided for the occasion afforded infinite satisfaction. Bellini's opera of I Puritani was received with the usual enthusiasm, and the favourite morceaux—the quartet " A to o cara," sung by Grisi, Rubini, Lablache, and Angioli ; the polacca of the prima donna ; the fine duct " II rivale salver to devi," between Lablache and Tamburini ; and the " Ella tremante" of Rubini, in the last act—were severally called for a second time, and the four imcomparablc artistes, whose sojourn in this country will now be brief, had to appear before the curtain at the conclusion of the opera. A miscellaneous act followed, which commenced with some dancing by the corps de ballet, succeeded by a pas de trois, by Perrot, who was warmly greeted on his appearance, Madlle. Ancement, and Madlle. Dorsay. Car lotta Grisi then made her promised debut as a singer; the an nouncement of which had excited no inconsiderable curiosity and speculation. The fair danseuse, however, proved that she was a cantatrice of no mean pretensions. Indeed, we are not quite sure whether she would not attain more same as a votary of Euterpe than a follower of Terpsichore. Her style strongly resembles that of her cousin, being distin guished by purity of' tone, and that ease and delicacy so pecu liar to La Grisi. Lablache led Carlotta on the stage, and remained with her during the cavatina, as she was evidently labouring under considerable trepidation, which to a certain extent impaired the effect of her singing. The composition chosen by her is new to us. It was stated to be Donizetti's " Regneva del Silenzio," from his Lucia di Lamermoor. It is a very graceful melody, with a harp obligato. Carlotta Grisi sang it with smoothness and precision, and her cadenzas were as elegantly selected as they were neatly e::ecuted. Her reception was very flattering, and the pro longed marks of delight would have justified a repetition, bad not the length of the piece and the timidity of the debutante induced the considerate portion of the audience to interfere. After a pas de deux by Mademoiselle St. Romain and Cons ton, Ivanhoff sang Donizetti's barcarole, " Or the in Cielo," and was encored. Lablachc then convulsed his hearers with laughter at the scena from La Prova, in which the fanatico conducts the rehearsal of an overture. Then came the Nea politan Tarenlella, danced with marvellous spirit and graceful skill by Perrot and Carlotta Grisi. It was a most characte ristic little scene, and from the accuracy of the costume and excellence of the music, had an amazing reality about it. It was immensely applauded. The " Galop," from Gustavus, concluded this very agreeable melange of singing and dancing. The whole terminated with the first act of Benyousky, which protracted the amusements to a late hour this morning. SPORTING INTELLIGENCE. IPSWICH RACES, WEDNESDA Y. The Town Members' Plate of 50 sous. Three years old, ist. ; four, Bst. 41b ; five, Bst. 121 b ; six and aged, 9st. 51b. Heats, two miles and a quarter The winner to be sold for 200/., &c. Mr. Clover's Menas, 3 yrs 0 1 I Lord Berners' br. c. by Lamplighter, 4 yrs 0 2 2 Mr. Smith's br. m. Eagle, 6 yrs 3 3 dr The first was a dead heat. An excellent race. The Town Purse of 50 sous. Conditions as above. Mr. Smith's Eagle, 6 yrs Mr. Tilbrooke's b. f. by Emilius, 3 yrs 2 dr 3 dr Mr. Reynard's Fusbos, 5 yrs EDINBURGH RACES, Tr,7E6n4r. Fifty sovs., given by the Duke of Buceleuch for any horse. Two miles. , Mr Ramsay's Despot, 6 yrs ......................... Noble I Lord Loughborough's Shamrock, aged His Majesty's Plate of 10 0 gs• Heats, two miles. Sir W. Scott's The Count, 5 yrs Wetherill 1 2 1 Mr. Meiklam's Corryvrechan , 4 yrs ••• ...... ••• 5 1 2 Lord Loughborough's Shamrock .................. 2 dis Mr. Weir's Defence ••• ................ ............ ••• 3 dis Mr. W. M. Alexander's ch. f. ..................... 4 dis Match, 50 sovs. One mile.—Mr, Ibbetson's Figaro (Holmes), beat Mr. Aleiklarn's Countess. The Omniparity added to a S weepsta k es of 2 sovs. each. once round an d a di stance. H P e l a a t t s f: Mr. Laing's Tamworth, 5 yrs O wner 0 1 1 Mr. Stnellie's Cistercian, aged 1 2 3 WEDNESDAY. The Cup Stakes of 10 sovs. each. Two miles. Mr. Ramsay s Despot, 4 yrs Noble 1 Mr. Meiklam's Margarette, 4 yrs The Edinburgh Subscription Plate of 50 sovs., added to a Stake of 3 soy!. each, p.p. The winner to be sold for 150 sovs., &c. Heats, two miles. Mr. Carfrae's Forester, 5 yrs Noble 0 1 1 Mr. Alexander's Little• go, 6 yrs 1 2 3 Mr Weir's Defence, 3 yrs Mr. Ibbetson's Figaro, 5 yrs 2 dr Fifty sovs, given by the Duke of Buccleuch. - Heats, once round and a distance. Mr. A. Curror's Cedric, 6 yr. - Owner 0 1 1 Mr. Weir's Telegraph, aged 1 2 2 Lady Brougham and her daughter arrived on Mon day evening at her Ladyship's house in Berkeley -scluaro, from Farrington, Lincolnshire, COURT OF COMMON c 1 /UNCIL. Yesterday, a Court was held for the dispat, ch of business. Mr. 11/611AM/ TAYLOR brought up the r, 'Port 'of the Committee appointed to prepare an address his Royal Highness the Duke of Sussex, congratulating L'itn upon the restoration of his sight. Mr. Taylor inforoted the Court, that the Committee had been assured from a private and authentic source that the recovery of his Royal I.lo— was steadily advancing. The report, which was seconded by, Mr. KEPPEL, was unanimously agreed to, and a deputation, with the Lord Mayor at its head, appointed to wait upon end present it to his Royal Highness. IMPROVEMENTS NEAR THE BANK. The Clerk of the Court read a letter from the authori ties of the Bank of England on the subject of giving- up four the public convenience the space at the end of Primes-. street, at present enclosed by a railing. The letter ex-. pressed a wish to render the public a service in the way re quired, but intimated an intention not to afford the accom modation until the city'should cause the houses in Loth bury to be thrower back to answer the good purpose of public utility. Mr. R. L. JONES, the. Chairman of the London Bridge Committee, proposed a reolution, which was seconded by Mr. JUPP, informing the Director,s that the Court had at present no power to effect the impiovement in Lothbury, hut would be glad to avail themselns of any opportunity that might present itself of obtaining power for that purpose. This motion was carried unanimously. The Court then adjourned. KING'S BENCH.-FRIDAY. THE ZING ON THE PROSECUTI,OIII OF ROBERTS V. PERRY, BROWN, TREADAWAY, BROUGHTON, J. EVANS, AND M. EVANS. This was an indictment against the defendants for con— spiring together to induce the wife of Roberts to quit her husband's residence and to take away his goods. Roberts was a person who had carried on an extensive business as a butterman and cheesemonger at the west-end of the town. In 1832, having been then above two years a widower, he married Anne Evans, with whom he had been acquainted in early life, for they were born and lived for years' in the They lived together till towards same part of the country. the close of the year 1833, when the conspiracy, which was the subject of the indictment, was alleged to have been formed. The brothers of the lady, John and William Evans, were not friendly to the marriage, and they are charged as the great instigators of this conspiracy. The Jury returned a verdict acquittin g the defendants Treadaway and Broughton, and finding Perry and Brown guilty ; but strongly recommending them to mercy, as they did not believe that those defendants had acted with any view to personal advantage. SHERIFFS COURT-FRIDA.Y. SMYTHE V. NORTHCROFT. This was an action of very great interest to the mem bers of the literary profession. It was brought to recover the sum of five guineas, for one week's salary, as the edi tor of a weekly publication, and five guineas for being dis charged without due and sufficient notice. Mr. CHADWICK Josms stated the case for the gain tiff. The plaintiff is Mr. George Lewis Smythe, a gende man well known in the literary world, and the defendant was the proprietor of a weekly publication called North croft's Parliamentary Chronicle. At the commencement of the present session the defendant, finding that the work did not answer his expectations, and that more funds were required than he had anticipated, resolved upon get ting some other persons to join him in the concern. Mr. Green, who was at that time the editor of the work, consented to become one of the partners, and was to in vest the sum of 300/. The plaintiff was then applied to to take the remaining share, and invest a like sum, with the understanding that if he did so he was to become the editor. The plaintiff wished for a short time to consider whether he would become a proprietor, but in the interim Performed the duty of editor. The plaintiff was subse quently discharged without any notice whatever, and when he applied for payment the defendant said he had not been engaged as editor, and that he (plaintiff) had no demand whatever upon upon him. The defendant, however, tea -1 dered a guinea, which the plaintiff refused. Mr. Layton, the editor of the Sunday Herald, proved that the plaintiff was engaged as editor of the above-named paper in conjunction with himself. He considered the plain tiff a person of considerable ability, and perfectly competent to undertake the editorship of a newspaper. The salary of five guineas claimed he considered very moderate. Mr. Rowland Riley, editor of the Town, had known the plaintiff many years. Considered him a gentleman of great talent, and perfectly competent to undertake the manage ment of a paper. Should have have considered it a gross insult had he been offered a guinea for the work alleged to have been done by the plaintiff. The charge of five guineas per week was very moderate. It was always the custom to give a month's notice previous to the discharge of a servant. Mr. KNOWLES addressed the jury for defendant. The Under-Sheriff summed up, and the jury, after a brief consultation, returned a verdict for the plaintiff.— Damages, 51. ss. ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. ROME CIRCUIT.---FRInar,JULY 8. Goodwin Hall, James Baldwin, and John Hall were in dicted for the wilful murder of James Barry. In stating the case Mr. DowLING said that Goodwin Hall struck the fatal blow, and the other prisoners were aiding and abetting hint. Mr. WORDSWORTH said there was no case against John Hall ; and the Learned Judge being of that opinion the Jury acquitted him. The two prisoners put in a written defence, and the Jury found them Guilty of Manslaughter, and his Lordship sentenced them to transportation for life, and said he should consider whether he should not send them to the worst part of the country. CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT. Yesterday, at ten o'clock a special commission was held at the Old . ' Court, before the Lord Mayor. Mr. Justice Vaugli'in, and Mr. Justice Bosanquet, Alderman M. Wood, Winchester, Lucas, Kelly, Atkins, Marshall, and Pirie, Mr. Sergeant Arabin, and the city authorities, for the pur pose of trying a Portugue3e sailor of the name of Manoel Antonio de Matto:, for the wilful murder of Jacob Kettles, a seaman, on land, out of the United Kingdom. After hearing evidence the Jary found the prisoner Not Guilty, and, on the application of Mr. CLARKSON he was discharged. THE SENTENCES. At one o'clock the Recorder, assisted by Aldermen Harmer and Lainson, Mr. Sheriff Salomons, and other City authori ties, proceeded to pass sentence on those prisoners who had been convicted during the present Sessions : To be imprisoned for Seven Days in Newgate--William Ashwell. For One Month—WNliam Murray, Elizabeth Marty, and Thon:as Smith. For Six Weeks—John Grny. For Two Months—Jane Ru3seli, John Smith, and George Bird. ~. For Three Months—Thomas Brindle, Wm. Smith, John Mead, Robert Toomey, Ann Slater, Join.' Smith, John Jones, William Brackett, Robert Whitehead, Sarah \Vatnell, Henry Taylor, John Bell, James Emerson Waldroc. alias Willi am Leicester, Matthew Wood Franklin, Charlotte Crawley. z For SLY Months —George Edwards, John Harl in g ton, John Brown, Jame? Whiffen, John Cook, Mary pawsol;• William Cooper, William c,,,bam, Mary Ann Wh ea t, Mkr Ann Middleton, William Ba ltiroth, Samu el Mawley, John ) 3 rown, and William King. AnnHunt,\ m . Nine M 'on ths—Mar ,, aret Foley and Ell en Callaghan. Tnelve Months—Margaret Cai n , Ann Humphries, Ma e Smith,kept t a o nd H C ar h d art L e a s bo St u e r v_en j s an . e . Cheeseman. bet F li o S r mTit,4ho, Years to b To be Transported for Seven Years—Catharine Neal, John Jones, Thomas Wood, John Hughes, William Cobb, Robert Thomas, Charles Malone, Isabella Morris, Charles Thomas, John Wilson alias Joseph Bank, Ann Jones alias Catherine Powers, Mary Ann Lewis, Ann Wilson (this female made use of the most disgusting language towards the Recorder', and endeavoured to fling some of the herbs which were placed on the bar of the Dock at the BeA'ch), Margaret Shaw, Geo. Green, John Smith, Alexander BLaseley, William Shum, \Yaycolt, William Kidman, Mary Ann Sweeney, George Willoughby, John Johnson, William Quelan, Michael Doran, Charles Brown, and Richard Steers. For Fourteen Years—Frederick Parsons, Ann Leeds, George Brown, Ann Rowland. William King Kent was then placed at the dock, when thft RECORDER said—Prisoner, you have pleaded guilty, and on your own confession have committed several acts of embezzle ment of various sums of money belonging to your employers. the Commissioners of Woods and Forests. The sentence of the Court is, that you be transported for fourteen years. • For Life—Marten Dunphy, William Beaumont, Benjamin alias Benedict Shepherd, Edward Mellish, William Hams, and Elizabeth Morgan. The RECORDER observed to the last-named prisoner that the law would take its course. William Kinsey, on whom sentence of death tvas passed at the last sessions, was placed at the bar, when the RECORDER said—The sentence which I am ordered to pass on you is that you be transported for life: The sentence, of John Young was rospited until the next sessions. Death—HcnrY Williams, for burglary, and Michael Sun: van, for cuttingand maiming. The Court was then adjourned until Monday the nth of August. - An inquest was held on Wednesday last, at Castle corner, on the body of a male child only four years old, who, it appeared, bad been induced by its unfortunate father, John Fitzpatrick, to drink ardent spirits, in consequence of which it died, —Mayo Constitution.